Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Faisal Khan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Pandey, learned A.P.P. for the State.
(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 23.09.2000 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj in Cr. Appeal no. 159 of 1997 whereby and where under the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Class, Palamau at Daltonganj in G.R. Case No. 1142 of 1996 (T.R. No. 97 of 1997) dated 29.07.1997 has been dismissed.
(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the only eye witness to the occurrence informant was examined as P.W.1. It has been submitted that the parties were on inimical terms and therefore the false implication of the petitioner cannot be ruled out. Learned counsel further submits that the original injury report was deliberately not produced by the prosecution and the entire conviction is based on false and fabricated injury report which has been exhibited as the behest of the Investigating Officer (P.W.6). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that injuries which were found on the person (P.W.1) were opined to be simple in nature. It has also been submitted that if this Court is not inclined to interfere in the order of conviction the sentence awarded to the petitioner be modified as the petitioner has remained for a month in custody and is facing the rigors of the prosecution case since 1996.;